The Composition Of The Defense Against The Arians

1. Observe that 71.3-72.1 (as far as ¿nXaTTero) is an obvious insertion into a preexisting context. The date of the letter of the catholicus Fl. Himerius about building a church for Ischyras (85.7) is not altogether clear: Opitz on 164.4 argued for 339 or later, but Athanasius quotes the letter to prove that the Eusebians rewarded Ischyras at once (85.5/6), and the fact that it describes him as a priest, not a bishop, ought to point to a date close to the Council of Tyre, perhaps autumn 335 (PLRE 1.437).

3. Opitz on 87, 167.19ff. The theory of unitary composition, though with a modified date of summer/autumn 356, is restated by V. Twomey, Apostolikos Thronos: The Primacy of Rome as Reflected in the Church History of Eusebius and the Historico-apologetical Writings of Saint Athanasius the Great (Münster, 1982), 292-305.

10. Hence Athanasius' reference to exile as something 'which I have suffered in the past and am now suffering' (59.5). Opitz on 140.4 takes this as referring to the exiles of 335 and 356 rather than those of 335 and 339.

11. Chapter XI. Hence the references to 'enemies' (1.1) and to Constantius and Constans as joint emperors (1.2), hence the protests against reopening a case so often decided (1.2-4), and hence too the overall argument.